|
Issues Artificial
Fertilization |
|
Artificial Fertilization:
Problematic issues |
The issue of artificial fertilization has raised many questions, and
the religious scholars have controversial opinions regarding it. Some of
them are proponents; others are opponents. Because of the moral and
social consequences that result from it, we believe we should highlight
this problematic issue with the Religious Authority, Sayyed Muhammad
Hussein Fadlullah, in order to benefit from his justifications and proofs
and to clarify its ambiguous aspects from a jurisprudential perspective.
Artificial fertilization
His Eminence saw that the artificial
fertilization process which is sometimes made by taking the sperm from an
unknown volunteer (other than the husband), in case the husband has no
sperms, or by implanting a sperm of a man (known) other than the husband
in the wife's womb, or by taking a sperm from the husband and fertilize
it in the ovary of a woman other than the wife… this process could not be
evaluated according to the physical/material criteria!! H.E. also
indicated that in the "reproduction system" there are two kinds of
relationships that are defined and codified by the Islamic law for the
sake of preserving the lineage, one is legitimate and the other is
illegitimate. Hence, there is no problem in fertilizing the ovum of the
wife with a sperm of her husband. Some people impose restraints on
showing the private organs, but, there are some solutions for this
problem. But, in principle, the artificial fertilization is permissible
if it is made from the husband and his wife, in which the ovum will be
taken from the wife's womb to be fertilized outside her body, then, it
will be returned back to her womb. Therefore, there is no problem with
this process and the baby is considered hundred per cent a legitimate
child.
It is illegitimate to fertilize a woman's
ovum with a sperm of a man other man rather than her husband, but this
process is not considered as a kind of adultery and the child is not an
illegitimate one because the definition of the illegitimate son differs
from this one. However, the child is not considered the son of the
husband, but rather the son of the owner of the sperm.
Another issue may be raised which is to
suppose that it is not a prohibited to fertilize an ovum of a woman
rather the wife with the sperm of a man, and then implant it in his
wife's womb.
Some may have tried to take legal
precautions in adopting this process, so, they included it in the
marriage contract. In this case, is it obligatory to take the ovum only
during the contract period from the woman whom the man concluded a
contract, or is it permissible to use the ovum that was fertilized before
concluding the marriage contract? In this case, His Eminence considered
that fertilizing the ovum of a foreign woman with the sperm of the
husband is an impermissible act and there is no room for any precaution
in this case. But, that will be permissible if he concludes a marriage
contract with this woman, without considering whether the fertilization
occurred before or after the contract. However, the problem is who will
be the mother of the ovum, the ovum’s owner or to the woman who carries
it? Our teacher Ayatollah Sayyed Al-Khoei considered that “the mother of
the child will be the woman who carries the ovum and gives birth to the
child, since, Allah says: {Their mothers are not,
but those who gave birth to them}. So, the mother is the one who
gives birth to the child.”
“The other opinion which we adopt along
with other scholars – considers that the mother of the child is the owner
of the ovum, since, the child is formed from the sperm and the ovum
together, and Allah knows best. Through justifying this operation, His
Eminence, depend on the idea of existence: “Because the ovum is the basis
of the child’s formation. Thus, the sperm and the ovum play an integral
role. Therefore, we see that the mother is not the woman who carries the
ovum and she is just like a container who holds it, nourishes it and
brings it up, whereas, she does not have any other role in making it grow
and she will be to him only like a foster mother. Surely, this is a
jurisprudential controversial issue.
If the sperm is from another man, the
husband will not be the father in this case, even though the ovum is
implanted in his wife’s womb. Besides, his approval does not make any
change. So, the marriage contract which brings the husband and his wife
together does not make him the father of her embryo which is not a result
of their matrimonial relationship.
Many medical institutions have made
different researches for the sake of improving the quality of artificial
fertilization in order to solve the problem of millions of sterile
spouses who do not have any choice other than adopting a child… H. E. saw
that the main idea of these institutions is based on the idea that says
that it is not important to have children from the husbands of wives and
that there is a method that must be adopted in order to achieve this
goal: first comes the freedom of sex as it was stated in Beijing’s
conference which was held for single mothers. However, we are not talking
about this method. We are discussing the method that is based on the fact
that the child's existence that is: "Being the father of the child means
that you have to be the cause of his existence; not your wife- whom you
have concluded a marriage contract with- that had the child from another
man, while, you do not have any thing to do with his existence".
Accordingly, His Eminence finds no
difference between that issue and the issue of adopting a child, since;
the children must be from both the husband and the wife. If the wife's
child is from a man other than her husband, “this will not be an internal
solution for the problem because the husband will just try to deceive
himself by thinking that the child is born inside the matrimonial life,
but, this does not mean that he is the child's father.
As to His Eminence, the problem is that:
"We try to engage wholly in the tragedy, while ignoring the nature of
reality. Hence, tragedy may bring your tears but it could not bring you a
means of solving your problem. Every one of us has his own tragedy that
he has to live. The general jurisprudential point of view considers that
the woman, who carries in her womb an ovum which is not hers, is not
considered the mother of the embryo, because, she did not participate in
his existence, but rather she participated in bringing him up and thus,
he is not her infant. Nowadays, some scholars consider that what causes
the woman to become a foster mother of the child is that the feeding must
exceed certain times of nursing. Therefore feeding the baby means that
the woman has given him something from her body and became his mother
even as a foster mother. Maybe, it is said that the embryo was nourished
from the mother for nine months, whereas, this is a jurisprudential issue
that has not reached a final ruling yet.
His Eminence sees that this fertilization
is not considered a compromise if one of the two spouses is the
father/mother of the child. He emphasized that the child’s existence is
based on the motherhood, fatherhood and the childhood, since; the child
is a continuity of the existence. You are a stranger to this child, what
is your relationship to him if there is a marriage contract between you
and his mother? What is the different between this child whom your wife
carries and who is not from you, and the child of your neighbor? The
marriage contract between you and her does not make a continuity of
existence. It creates a lawful process which legitimized for you and for
your wife certain situations.”
On the other hand, His Eminence indicated
that “nothing in the Sharia is called “lending a womb” without a
legitimate ruling. Therefore, it is impermissible to insert a sperm of a
foreign man in the womb of a married woman. It is also impermissible for
him to conclude a marriage contract with her because she has a husband.
If a woman is unmarried and is not fulfilling a Iddat period, it is
permissible for a man who concluded a contract with her to insert his
sperm in her womb or transmit an ovum which is fertilized with his sperm
to her womb.”
However, The Sayyed considers that the
artificial fertilization or the so called "tube babies" is permissible on
condition that: "the fertilization is made from the sperm of a husband
and the ovum of his wife. It is also permissible to take out the man's
semen either by an instrument or by masturbation through the wife's hand,
while he has to avoid showing the doctor his private organ. The woman
also should not show the male doctor her vulva, except if it was the only
way to be pregnant.
With respect to some jurisprudential
issues in which the Taqleed of both the doctor and his patient differs at
a time it is necessary to make some surgeries such as ovariectomy (the
surgical removal of one or both ovaries), inserting the loop, or other
issues that are controversial among scholars, His Eminence considers
that, “the doctor must follow his/her Marja’ (Religious Authority)
because he/she is responsible for this process. For instance, if a woman
emulates a Marja’ who permits her to look at the private sexual organs of
the other woman and she visits a female doctor whose Taqleed prohibits
her to look at the private sexual organs of another woman, the female
doctor in this case is prohibited from treating her patient in
unnecessary cases. If a female doctor emulates a Marja’ who has no
opinion or Fatwa concerning this issue, it would be permissible for her
to look at the private sexual organs of her female patient whose Marja’
permits her to do so.
|